Reader comments · German HIV advert uses Hitler lookalike · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


German HIV advert uses Hitler lookalike

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. It’s an effective ad
    I looked at Hitler’s face for a few seconds and was no longer in the mood for sex
    Very Effective!

  2. Eh? What’s the message?

  3. Lucio Buffone 8 Sep 2009, 12:01am

    I don’t want to comment on this actual ad, but at least the Germans are running campaigns against HIV infection. When I was last in Germany there were ads everywhere billboards, TV, Press (not just gay press).

  4. Diseases crop up as natural forms of population control. Unfortunately, humans are the only animal that have figured out medicinal methods to prolong the inevitable while hyper-depleting their resources and toxifying their environment. Prepare yourself: a better plague than HIV is lurking right around the corner. Equating HIV with genocide is apt. But why is Der Führer shtupping a raven-haired Nicole Kidman in the brown button?

  5. I fail to understand the connection between HIV and Hitler.
    HIV was first discovered in the early 1980s.
    Hitler died 35 years earlier in 1945.
    Hitler was impotent! (or was it his attitude towards women)?
    When Hitler was 40 years old, his girlfriend Eva Brown was of the tender age of 17!!!
    Evidently, the Director and Producer of this ad, have confused HIV and Pediaphilia.

  6. Ryan Haynes - fyi radio 8 Sep 2009, 9:15am

    Nasaddle – having sex with a 17 year old does not mean anyone is a Pedophile – correct me if I am wrong, but 16 is the legal consensual age?!

    Also – Hitler = Mass Murder, pretty obvious really?!

  7. I watched this ad last week on YouTube without knowing that it came from Germany and without hearing of any Hitler connection. What I saw was a couple coming home, going at it passionately, and then at the end the male being shown to have the face of some aggressor, some devil. It was the upturned eyes that caught my attention. For for a moment did I think “Hitler!” or “Saddam!”. The message was clear: you meet someone, you get carried away, you have passionate unprotected sex . . . and you don’t know this may be a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

    “However, the ad was attacked by HIV charity Terrence Higgins Trust, which said it could stigmatise people with the disease.”

    Yes, it “could” stigmatise people with HIV disease.
    It “could” have lots of negative other consequences as well.
    However, it “could” have lots of positive consequences.
    But most importantly it WILL grab people’s attention and flag up the definite relationship between hot passionate and unprotected sex and becoming infected with HIV. And that’s the priority.

  8. sorry, that is meant to read, “Not for a moment did I think “Hitler!” or “Saddam!” The message was clear: you meet someone, you get carried away, you have passionate unprotected sex . . . and you don’t know this may be a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

  9. Glad to see that we can always rely on Eddy posting his usual ignorant and uncaring bile when it comes to HIV and anyone infected with HIV.

    There are plenty of far more original ways of making a hard-hitting advert that doesn’t stigmatise and the plain and simple truth of it is that this advert makes a wholly unnecessary and unjustified connection between Hitler and people who are living with HIV – and for that reason alone it should be condemned.

  10. Not of course forgetting the perfectly valid point that has already been made by THT: almost 30% of those infected with HIV don’t know they are infected and are the source of the vast majority of transmissions in here the UK. This sort of advertising – in effect saying that if you are HIV-positive you are no better than the most prolific mass murderer who ever lived – will do nothing at all to create the environment in which those people are encourage those people to come forward and test.

  11. Dr Ford Hickson (Sigma Research) 8 Sep 2009, 11:52am

    So, people with HIV are wolves.
    People without HIV are sheep.
    People with diagnosed HIV look like wolves when we know they have HIV. When we don’t know, they look like sheep.
    People with undiagnosed HIV always look like sheep, think they are sheep, but are in fact wolves.
    Wolves eat sheep. They stalk them, terrorise them and kill them.
    Sheep are helpless bleaters.

    Who could we blame when if we no longer had wolves on the edge of our forest?

  12. Seems to me to be a pretty effective campaign.

    Everyone has heard the message and is fairly complacent (you only have to look at how prevelant bareback is to see people are no longer scared).

    Shock works and this shocks. Remember the Benetton ad of 1992 – ?

  13. Some people foolishly and unthinkingly assume that everybody’s appreciation of this film will be that it is the person carrying the virus and not putting on a condom that is being warned of.


    And it is a fact that this virus can be transmitted in scenarios like that depicted in the video.

    It is also a fact that sometimes people carrying the virus deliberately and intentionally have unprotected sex during which THEY KNOW that the virus may well be passed on.

    These are facts. There are a lot of facts. You can’t hide some and only present others. All facts have to be presented.

  14. Glad to see that we can always rely on Eddy posting his usual ignorant, uncaring and selectively incomplete summation of ‘facts’.

  15. And as we have seen before, we have blind prejudiced visitors who, it is apparent, simply cannot grasp the MEANING of what they read.

    The point of my first post in this thread very clearly was that if one sees this video without having been told of a Hitler connection, you do NOT come away from it thinking that some woman has just been screwed by Hitler. (It’s too dark to work out that it’s Hitler for one thing!)

    Instead, you come away from this video reflecting that a few moments of hot steamy passion can turn out to have been moments in which an incredibly disabling virus (that without toxic medication and difficult life-long management and perseverance) was able to invade and infect a body.

    Excellent campaign. A campaign that has the guts to counter all the messages that people get these days in films, glossy magazines, and on the internet to have wild and passionate sex with abandon.

    Well done, Germany!

  16. Some people foolishly and unthinkingly assume that everybody’s appreciation of this film will be that it is the person carrying the virus and not putting on a condom that is being warned of.

    Pray tell us who has assumed that everyone will see the film like that. Or was that just another of Eddy’s habitually angry, foolish and unthinking comebacks?

  17. And as we have seen before, we have blind prejudiced visitors who, it is apparent, simply cannot grasp the MEANING of what they read.

    You are indeed prejudiced, Eddy, and yes you do indeed have great difficulty grasping the meaning of anything.

  18. How predictable to see hiv sector trolls out in force to condemn an hiv campaign that actually grabs our attention unlike their ineffective, wishy washy half-baked efforts that only succeed in draining public resouces. With the truth now emerging about where their hiv-enabling policies really lie, very soon they will be exposed as the mass murderers nearly on a par with those depicted in the German campaign. Yes, there policies have led thousands upon thousands of gay men into aquiring hiv. It is the elephant in the room that can no longer remain hidden.

  19. Hi, Sam. Good to see you back counteracting the, as you put it so well, HIV sector trolls out in force to stamp out any disagreement with inappropriate AIDS/HIV “education” in this country.

    Sam, I don’t propose to hang around this thread arguing with these fools. But I will let you in on one thing. The matter is now out of the Pink News columns. The whistle’s going to be blown out in the public domain sometime quite soon. “Believe me, I know”! :-) A Big Hug to you, Eddy.

  20. And as per usual, anyone who doesn’t agree with the ignorant Eddy and his sockpuppets is accused of being an HIV sector troll. How boring predictable – and quite ironic when it comes from the most rabid troll of the lot.

  21. Right and here we have the one poor blind prejudiced troll who runs around using different IDs to give the impression that dozens agree with his point of view. Sorry “Landas” but you used that exact phrase “ignorant Eddy and his sockpuppets” under one of your other names in another thread.

  22. Hi Eddy, if what you say us true then it can’t be before time. I ans many othets want to see the hiv sector loons in the dock and made to answer for their crimes against humanity, because that is a charge that must be levelled at them. They can no longer use the hiv stigma. Card because that has been proven to be a red herring. If what they say us true, that all gay men know the serious downside to hiv, then that means mat gay men are making a decision to become infected and therefore cannot be regarded as “helpless victims” who’s feelings need saving. Sod their damned feeling and let’s get back to the business of shocking people back to safe sex, keeping our communities healthy and saving lives. That is the ONLY way forward, and anyone suggesting otherwise should have their face super-imposed on the german ad, and I don’t care in which role…

  23. Hmm the important debate being had further up the comment thread seems to have turned into a battle of accusations.

    Gentlemen, given that Godwin’s Law doesn’t apply here (given the subject matter), please take it outside…

  24. Sorry to disappoint you, Eddy, but I just saw the comment in the other thread and thought ‘Eddy and the sockpuppets’ neatly summed up what a tragic little hateful man you are. Would that be the same thread in which you, in the face of the overwhelming evidence of you trolling with multiple identities, claimed it was impossible to do what you are now accusing others of?

    The simple fact is that you love this advert because you hate people who are HIV-positive and think they should be isolated from the rest of society. The sad part of it is that you aren’t man enough to admit it and, being the snivelling coward that you are, therefore have to couch it in other terms and use alternate identities.

  25. Eric Watson 8 Sep 2009, 4:35pm

    Sam, you really are the most incredibly insensitive slime-ball. No one here has asked for sympathy for those who are HIV-positive, but they have a right to expect to be protected from people, like you and Eddy, stigmatising them just because it suits their prejudices to do so.

    As for the HIV stigma card being proven to be a red herring, you must be must be confusing reality with your dreams. It certainly isn’t as imaginary as your identity.

    I suggest the only way forward is to superimpose your ugly mug over Hitler’s face on the advert. If that doesn’t put everyone off sex for life, it will certainly scare everyone and his dog into restricting themselves to a lifetime of sober protected sex.

  26. Eric Watson and Landas. Your names are unfamiliar on these threads. Regular readers know me. And they know that your statement suggesting of me that “you love this advert because you hate people who are HIV-positive and think they should be isolated from the rest of society” is complete and utter crap.

    So you’ve made a fool of yourself, I’m afraid.

  27. Where on earth does Terrence Higgins Trust’s “policy officer” get off when she deigns to speak for HIVers in claiming that “anything that could increase stigmatisation and discourage them from coming forward to be tested isn’t helpful”? When the hell are these wretchedly patronising opinionists going to start treating us all like intelligent adults who are more than capable of taking responsibility for our HIV status? What qualifies her PC-deranged ilk to make such sweeping and generalised statements that serve only to give HIV an easy ride while overriding their social and moral duty to stem its spread? And why on earth is the media broadcasting THT’s propaganda as if it is public opinion when the fact is that most sane thinkers want harder-hitting campaigns to make people sit bolt upright and take heed of the messages they contain? THT receiving half a million pounds of lottery money to unleash its insane propaganda on youngsters as young as ten years old was really the last straw for me. I have now petitioned my own MP and others I know are petitioning theirs. THT is not fit for purpose, and it hasn’t been since the early nineties.

  28. tongueincheek 8 Sep 2009, 10:16pm

    I want to state for the record, as a 21-year-old gay man, how utterly appalled I am by the vicious, unprovoked attacks that are being heaped upon our marvellous HIV charities, who work selflessly and heroically to improve the lot of gay men in the UK.

    For the record, early last year I was an extremely confused 20-year-old who had not come to terms with his sexuality. Living a sheltered upbringing in Pease Pottage in East Sussex, I was curious to know more about the exciting gay life which I knew existed 50 miles up the M23. So one day I set off by train to London and made it to the thrilling streets of Soho which I had heard was the gay mecca.

    Venturing nervously into my first gay bar there I picked up my first copy of QX magazine as if it was the Holy Grail. I took it home and religiously explored between the pages to discover what gay life was really all about. Lots and lots of sex! Oh joy! And clubbing! And drugs!

    And… there it was on page 5, ‘’, a new web site designed by the THT to educate all curious gay men, it said. That’s me, I exclaimed, and proceeded to explore its contents. In a day I learned all there was to know about barebacking, bondage, breath control, catheters, cock and ball torture, corporal punishment, enemas, felching, fisting, saline, scat, tit torture, watersport and a cornucopia of other activities. The way these acts were described seemed like near-transcendental experiences. It was only on my third visit to the site that I discovered a “things to know” section cautioning about some of the potential downsides, but since these were not highlighted risks compared to the thrills of each activity I didn’t pay much attention to these.

    Well, it was all very well knowing the A/Z of gay sex moves – now I wanted to try them out for myself (well, perhaps drawing a line at scat…). So I got myself a Gaydar profile and found the search facility most useful for finding men who could teach me each category individually, which necessitated a trip up to London each weekend over the duration of the following summer. One of these guys offered to take me to a club where I could witness these acts live for myself, and what’s more it was endorsed by the THT, so what better seal of approval could I hope for?

    So thanks to THT I was fully initiated into the gay world and at last felt a sense of belonging. However, I was also aware of the nasties that lurked and played safely with condoms. Although I knew people made greater play of HIV than other STIs, I knew that that was one nasty to avoid altogether.

    Just to be certain, I called the GMFA helpline for some guidance on HIV. “Oh, it’s not the big killer it used to be 20 years ago,” I was told. “In fact, it’s now completely manageable, and if you do contract it then expect to live a normal lifespan so long as you adhere to a regimen of antiretroviral medications.” Hmm, maybe not so bad, I thought out loud. “Oh,” added the GMFA receptionist, “if you are planning unsafe sex, remember there’s always PEP on hand…”

    Things were looking decidedly rosier than the grim picture that had been painted about the so-called dangers of gay sex, for example among those who rant on here about the need for harder hitting HIV campaigns. What utter killjoys! Hyperbole invented by some miserable old self-hating b^st^rds to stop the rest of us having total freedom to have the time of our lives!

    At my third attendance to the hard sex club in South London I met Barry, who coincidentally enough turned out to work for one of the main London HIV charities, and he introduced me to a couple of his friends who were having a great time in the sling room. Unfortunately, that was also the occasion I came Tina, aka crystal meth. “Take this, it will make you feel like God,” was all I needed to hear. Well, I had no prior knowledge of how invincible Tina made you feel – it wasn’t mentioned in any THT or GMFA literature I had come across – and I have to say I slipped up that night and went bareback. But not to worry, the PEP adverts all over the gay press clearly confirmed that you can plan a weekend of unsafe sex and turn up at the STI clinic on Monday morning for treatment!

    So, on Monday morning I hopped on a train to the main STI centre in Brighton and was prescribed my first course of PEP! I really felt like I had the gay life down to a fine art by now, like I was ticking off all the essential things a gay man needs to do by the time he reaches 25. Well, according to the HIV charities at least. Be fisted (tick!). Go to an underground sex club (tick!). Use PEP (tick). etc. etc. I truly felt like I had arrived and was finally initiated into the gay world.

    I endured the 28 day course of PEP and was chronically sick for most of that time, enough to make me realise that a planned weekend of unsafe sex was just not worth it. So I vowed to myself always to play safe from now on, even if I was now taking crystal meth on a regular basis and its use was erasing all memories of any safe sex message from my mind. I also followed through on the advice of the STI clinic and had an HIV test just to make sure that I had not been infected. The result came back positive.

    I immediately contacted the THT for advice and information, and, God bless them, they were only too pleased to tell me about all the many services they offered that were now available to me, and told me about all the various drugs that I would need to stay healthy. In fact I found their keenness to sign me up to as many of their services as possible to be most touching. These people are really there for me, I thought. There really are angels walking among us and I am truly blessed.

    So now I really, truly feel I have arrived as a gay man! I receive an endless free supply of prescribed medicines to keep me fit and strong and live a normal life span, and if I play with other positive men then I don’t need to use a condom! And for my part I can always say I contributed to THT’s cash flow by being another HIV statistic to add to their business plan when they go cup in hand to the government to fund their public support services.

    It’s a win-win situation really, so when will all the nay-sayers and doom merchants on here keep going on and on about how these charities have let gay men down and even hinting that they may be working to some sinister agenda I just want to scream out loud SHUT THE F^CK UP, YOU HEAR!!!!!

  29. What the hell are “hiv sector trolls” and “hiv sector loons”?!?

    Seriously, this is quite disturbing.

  30. Troll Watch 9 Sep 2009, 9:56am


    Dare I say it, but those don’t sound like the words of a 21-year old. They sound rather like a PR piece for “main London HIV charity”.

    This thread seems now to have more trolls and more sockpuppets than an episode of fraggle rock.

  31. “This thread seems now to have more trolls and more sockpuppets than an episode of fraggle rock.”

    Are you taking the piss or something? There is a conspiracy by the THT and other HIV organisation to do what exactly?

    Ever hear of paranoid schizophrenics?

  32. Tongueincheek, your lies and parody of a gay man’s life insults all of us. Get some help to sort out your internalised homophobia and stop portraying us gay men as stupid, reckless and uncaring. Stop blaming HIV charities for being the cause of your false bigoted view of gay men.

  33. Hi Will! Please see private message I’ve just sent you. Eddy.

  34. Thanks for your contribution tongueincheek. A clever way to show what is going on from the point of view of an imaginary gay man entering the gay scene for the first time. It would be laugh-out-loud funny in places if not for the fact that it is so frighteningly close to the truth in the experiences of many.

  35. I have been following these Pink News threads about HIV, beginning with the brilliant comment article that appeared two or three weeks back, with much interest. Not least because in my home city of Sydney, Australia, we have been having a similar debate. In fact disgruntled community members have already succeeded in forcing the resignation of the CEO of NSW’s leading AIDS body that was originally set up to prevent the escalation of HIV among gay men. As in the UK, The AIDS Council of NSW has provenly presided over HIV’s relentless spread amid a reign of virtual enablement and resulting in ‘Sub-Saharan levels of HIV’ in the most densely poppulated gay areas of Sydney:- and that is the admission of one of their own medical advisors! It is so encouraging to see that similar organizations in the UK are now being forced to account for their unjustifiable practises, though the evasive tactics of Matthew Dobson in his ‘HIV charity fights back’ defence last week was truly shaming. Surely it should have been headed HIV Charity Dodges And Swerves Issue, instead?
    Having known several people who worked for ACON at its ground level, I would hasten to accuse all people working within these community orgs of being witting accomplices in the rise of HIV. At least where ACON is concerned it is well known that you have to be what I term a “PC militant” if you want your face to fit, otherwise you won’t last there for long. Psychological profiling of such individuals show them to have a general lack of empathy and intuitive awareness of their fellow man and that they are imbued with pathalogical traits which makes it easy for them to
    twist logic and tell blatant lies because to them it is the truth. They cannot distinguish between truth and the lies they are indoctrinated with as part of their training in the job. This renders such people into robotic thinkers:- completely logical but the sort of people who wouldn’t flinch if they saw a little old lady being mugged on the street for example.
    It is because of how their brains are wired and developed (I am not an expert but something to do with how the left sphere of the brain works with the right sphere), so it is not like they are deliberately participating in skulduggery and deceit. However because they see themselves as separate from everyone else and believe life is all about each for their own and survival of the fittest that is why they are so dangerous, especially in areas to do with healthcare because they will say anything that furthers their soulless agendas, maintains their stands and basically ensures the furtherence of their careers and ultimately the pursuit of power, no matter the amount of damage they cause to people in the process. That is why so many of these similar sounding postings attacking truthful individuals like Eddy are so ferocious, nasty and lacking in human decency and basic common sense. PC militants honestly cannot see what is wrong with their provenly sadistic approach to protecting their communities because they have no understanding or comprehension of the pain or despiar
    their actions cause, so perhaps best for those who stand for truth to ignore their badly coordinated counterattacks and just get on with trailblazing the truth for the majority of people who can still comprehend it.
    Regarding the German advert, from what I know of the gay scene there I can see why it is so graphic. Berlin has a particularly hard and often sadistic sex scene (possibly to to do with their collective guilt complex following two world wars) and such messages need to be suitably hard in order to be noticed. I doubt whether such a campaign would be suitable for Australia or Great Britain but there is no doubt that UK HIV campaigns have long been wide of the mark and regarded as something of a joke in other developed countries, even those who follow a similar soft-edged approach. I thought my country’s efforts were pretty weak, but
    having seen what British gays are spoonfed in the weekly gay press it is truly alarming bordering on criminal negligence, and astonishing that this debate has taken so long to commence.
    Finally thank you Eddy for your many on the ball contributions to these threads. You are a true ambassador for your community and have simply allowed the facts and the truth speak for themselves against a vicious welter of assaults and pathological denial from those desperate to maintain the status quo of deception and illusion within the HIV lobby and, more pertinently, to maintain the gravy train that is substantially rewarding a few at the top of these orgs at the cost of the lives of our beloved brothers. I look forward to hearing of the great day when the British HIV lobby’s house of cards come crashing down and the interests of its gay men are once more put first.

    Col, Double Bay (Sydney)

  36. Thank you, Col, for this contribution from Australia. It is so reassuring to perceive that you have clearly read through the Comment threads carefully. If only the individuals working for the HIV/AIDS “educators” would do the same.

    By the way, I have read that there have been strong calls for much tougher campaigns across the Tasman recently, in New Zealand, following a dramatic rise in HIV infection there and the New Zealand Aids Federation has come under the same sort of fire that GMFA and THT are now under here.

  37. Oh dear,

    Something is rotten in the state of Denmark

  38. Thanks for this Eddy. Nothing we did not already know, though seeing it up on the Aidsmap web site it will now be impossible for GMFA and THT’s henchmen who have fouled these related discussion boards these past few weeks to continue their deceitfulful and deadly charade that gay men can catch HIV and live a normal lifespan. The noose grows ever tighter around their necks by the day…

  39. Support for HIV suffers here truly appalling, and what’s worse is this is a gay site. Your shrill acquisitions of conspiracy and vengeance and is akin to that one might gain at a Rev Phelps convention. Or in a nut house.
    While I’m sure you are all hermit monks here would never partake in that vile action called sex, the reality is people have contracted HIV from other means other then lying face down in a sex club waiting for anyone to infect them. Its a disease. Threat it like such, grow up, and show the sufferers some bloody compassion.

    You people disgust me.

  40. LOL! The HIV sector mob of two have gone through so many aliases that now they are using girls’ name. How appropriate!

  41. Rob, you’re a f****** moron, you know that? I am not the “HIV sector mob”, whatever that stupid term is supposed to mean, I am the sister of a straight man that contracted the virus.

    What a delight it is to hear people like you Rob, who have just proven my point that you need an attitude readjustment. Believe what paranoid lunatic conspiracy you want, the truth is you have the humanity of a cockroach.

  42. Dr Ford Hickson (Sigma Research) 11 Sep 2009, 12:08pm

    This TV advert is incredibly misguided. Intervention evaluation the world over shows the one thing associated with negative outcomes in HIV is uninformed fear. The ad and the accompanying posters illicit fear but provide no information. Just about the worst thing you can do. But worst still, it can be expected to have the EXACT OPPOSITE EFFECT of those espoused by its creators. The more people without HIV identify people with HIV as being like Hitler, the less likely they are to identify someone they find attractive and want to be intimate with as potentially having HIV. We need images of HIV as people we love, not people we hate.

  43. “We need images of HIV as people we love, not people we hate.”

    Thank you! One decent human being here. The rest of you are just idiot conspiracy theorists with no real proof to your moronic accusations.

  44. “Enough of this woolly-wooled liberalism that insists we must love the virus.”

    Are you suffering from head trauma? “Wolly-wolly liberalism”??? After you insult someone here who has a family member with the HIV, you come up with that nonsense as your rebuff? What are you, a buffoon?!?

    No one is saying “love the virus”. Are you an idiot or something? Who would love a virus? Seriously. Who? Where does it say, or anyone say, that we have to “love the virus”? What the more logical (and sane) people here are saying, is that HIV is a virus, and it should be seen as that. People who have HIV should be treated with any less compassion and any cancer sufferer, not views as recipients of some wrathful vengeance for their “actions”, no matter how they contracted the disease. We have enough retarded religious nuts to do that for us, thanks. Do we do the same for cancer patients who once smoked? Do we do the same for malaria sufferers who didn’t take the medication on holidays? Take the stigma out of the virus and then we have a chance to pass on the facts. You are not part of the solution, Rob, all you are is the one who builds up the prejudice against HIV sufferers, and you should be ashamed to call yourself gay!

    Science will eventually, and hopefully, find a cure or a vaccination and good, positive education will reduce the infection rates. Not stigmatisation. That only leads to underground activities, shame for the sufferers, and ultimately an increased mortality rate. What won’t make one bit of difference is your stupid “woolly-wooled liberalism” insults about the bogey-man virus!

    Linda, not all of us this like that fool. I am sorry about your brother, and I am sorry (and embarrassed) you had to suffer this halfwit and his offensive attitude to you. Clearly being gay doesn’t not imply compassion for our gay brothers who have fallen to this awful disease. But know that I am not one of them.

  45. Thanks for that Will. I didn’t mean to imply all of you were like him, I had seen your comments earlier pointing out the insanity of using terms like ‘HIV SECTOR TROLL’, and some others who no doubt are branded with this stupid term because they see HIV as something to fight, not to fear. I emailed Rob’s distasteful/insane comments to my brother. He just laughed. And to be honest, that’s all comments like his deserve.

  46. NAT released a statement on this badly thought out advert, which I agree with 100%:

    “There are three main failings to the campaign:

    Firstly, linking the risk of HIV infection to having sex with a mass murderer is immensely stigmatising of people living with HIV. Stigma is the great barrier to an effective response to the epidemic. It is what prevents testing, and inhibits frank discussion of HIV status and sexual risk.

    Secondly, the campaign is inaccurate. It makes no mention of the fact that in Europe effective treatment exists which means HIV is no longer a death sentence. People diagnosed in time can expect nowadays a near normal life-span.

    Thirdly, it provides no information on the posters or in the video of how to protect yourself and others from HIV infection – use a condom when having sex; do not share injecting equipment for drug use.

    Effective public health campaigns can sometimes use shock tactics well – but irresponsible and incredible statements only mean that in the end people stop listening.”

    Congratulations to NAT for such a clear and level headed response.

  47. Quel surprise! Who should be lurking in the shadows but noneother than Will and our old friend BSE. Speaking of mad cows, Linda’s message packs a mighty amount of testestorone for one so diminutively named. But how sicko to invent an imaginary brother with hiv to put your point across. My what joy to watch cockroaches running out of rocks under which to scuttle! The game is up guys, or are you prepared to challenge Aidsmap’s finding that hiv cuts life short by over two decades and that the meds DON’T provide normal and healthy life spans to pozzies as you have lied all these years?

  48. “Linda’s message packs a mighty amount of testestorone for one so diminutively named. But how sicko to invent an imaginary brother with hiv to put your point across.”

    Oh my god. You evil, horrible, nasty, uncaring little man. Just presume in your tiny mind for one second that Linda does have a brother with HIV and imagine how you would feel in her position if someone said that to you. You don’t know it’s not true so to come out with that in your pure ignorence is disgraceful.

    And the comment about testosterone and being diminutively named – she has a woman’s name and had a point to make so cut the misogyny you sad and hateful man.

  49. Folks around here are fond of quoting from here is one from this week “How Long Will You Live With HIV? Take Studies With a Grain of Salt”

    Diagnosed in 1985 I didn’t expect to see 25 now I’m 45 and scarily looking to retirement in 20 years, we live in changing times, the ARV’s are far from perfect but they are very helpful for most of us but as I said before immunology is always person specific HIV even more so.

  50. Monkeychops 12 Sep 2009, 5:01pm

    From anyone I’ve spoken to who has seen it, they see Adolf as being HIV itself NOT someone with HIV who preys on innocent people. It portrays a danger that is not only hidden but may be waiting to strike even in the most enjoyable of activities. It seems its only people on here who are not able to get that message. Perhaps there should be a separate campaign for those who are too intellectual to comprehend such basic messages. Or too wimpy to watch such a “harsh campaign”.

    There is nothing misguided about this advert and it is about time people saw some more shocking campaigns because, funnily enough, the problem hasn’t gone away with the wet attempts of the softies currently in the HIV/AIDS domain. If it weren’t for having seen the graphic AIDS adverts in the 80s where people were engraving the word onto tombstones, I doubt anyone in this country would have been moved to act. If people with HIV/AIDS get stigmatised in the process, that’s a shame, but if the thought of being stigmatised is enough to stop people taking the risk, then that can only be a good thing. No-one said life was fair, but we’re beyond the fair stage now because things are so serious. I’d rather we did whatever it takes to get rid of this awful illness than spend time fussing over the feelings of people who already have it.

    Alternatively, maybe Germans are just a bit brighter and considerably less wet behind the ears than Brits. Their society far more advanced than ours at pretty much every level anyway.

  51. Monkeychops 12 Sep 2009, 5:11pm

    “The more people without HIV identify people with HIV as being like Hitler, the less likely they are to identify someone they find attractive and want to be intimate with as potentially having HIV. We need images of HIV as people we love, not people we hate.”

    Erm no Dr, actually I don’t want to be sexually intimate with anyone with HIV. I want to be as far as I can be away from that illness. If my brother/friend were to contract it, I would naturally support him as someone who is already close, but I’m not going to go out of my way to feel sorry for people who contracted it through their own ignorance or stupidity. No more than I would anyone who had any other STI. Contracting an STI full stop is not a bad indicator of what kind of a person they are. I’m not taking any risks and you cannot bully people with some twisted sense of morality into doing so.

  52. “But how sicko to invent an imaginary brother with hiv to put your point across.”

    I agree with Adrian. What a absolute bottom feeder you are, Sam. Yo have no proof that Linda’s story is not real, so what you have said there is simply disgusting. Well done, you make us all proud.

    Look, some of the comments are now nothing more then lunacy.

    What some people are trying to say here, in the mists of shrill accusations of being “anti-hiv-sector-trolls” or what ever ridiculous name you want to give yourselves to validate your stupidity, is that no one wants to contract HIV. No one, at least, that is mentally balanced would want to. Assuming there are these “bug-chasers” who constitute a minute fraction of the population (as I said, normal mentally healthy people do not wish to contract any potentially terminal disease), the vast majority of people will not wish to contract HIV.

    However, IF you do contract HIV, for whatever reason, then the facts are, you can possibly avert a horrendous death by a sever and very difficult medication regime. This is simple fact. Its by no means a solution to prevention, it is for those who do contract HIV. Medical science is about reality. The reality of the harshness of such a medication, but I doubt any HIV sufferer will chose a potential death over its hardship.

    If you contract cancer, the chemotherapy isn’t nice, it’s awful and deeply shocking to the system, but it’s a slim chance that you might live afterwards. No one smokes with blatant disregard of the consequences simply because the chemotherapy will cure them afterwards, do they?

    And there is no stigma attached to cancer sufferers. With HIV however, people killed themselves in the 80’s because they contracted HIV after they were told that they had perhaps 5 years to live and it was because of the “sinful virus” called HIV, for f***s sake!

    No one in their right mind goes off and says “well it’s okay to catch HIV, as I can take the medication afterwards”, and if you believe the majority of people do this, then you are quite simply a fool. But to hide the fact the medication exists because someone might “think its okay to catch HIV” is assuming everyone is as mentally imbalanced and stupid as you, Sam.

    And it seems we have a long way to go with the paranoia and irrational prejudices among our own community. This thread has been an eye opener, and a disturbing one at that.

  53. Hi Will, I entirely agree that this thread has been an eye opener and a disturbing one like that, but I base this conclusion on postings such as your own which are either entirely misguided or written to a clear cut agenda that is systemically seeking to keep gay men uninformed about the seriousness of HIV infection and the importance of safe sex techniques.

    You are saying that no one in their right mind would set out to catch HIV just because they know that a regimen of effective meds are on hand to prolong their life if they do contract it. I presume by that you also include PEP? Are you implying, then, that most/all of the 3000 or so gay men who were diagniosed HIV last year contracted HIV by accident, for example through condoms breaking, as opposed to pre-meditated risky sex and the knowledge that PEP is on hand? Because if you are then you are either badly informed or downright ignorant.

    Not only are PEP and today’s meds an incentive to engage in unsafe sex, but combined with these factors has been negligence and downright betrayal of the HIV charities whose job it is to educated gay men how to play safe and to NOT contract the virus. It is they who have demoted HIV to “manageable” status and turned their back on safe sex campaigns in favour of safer sex/”risk minimisation” campaigns which gay men are interpreting as a green light to dispense with condoms in favour of pulling out before coming, etc.

    Subsequently gay men are intentionally participating in reckless sex because the perceived risks and dangers have been diluted, and as we all know gay men only need a little indication that it is OK to ditch the condoms and they will do so, even if their subconscious mind is telling them otherwise. The HIV sector’s trivialising of HIV in recent years has given many gay men, the weaker-willed in particular, the permission they need to have unprotected sex.

    Furthermore, instead of taking a lead and speaking out against the plethora of sex clubs and bareback porn these last few years, our so called health educators have instead rubber-stamped venues where condoms are frowned upon and the transmission of pathogens is rampant, and have maintained a stiff upper lip about bareback porn or uttered such bilge as “gay men should stop buying bareback porn if they don’t like it” or some such claptrap – a total contradiction in terms, of course, but then this was from the mouth of an individual who in a recent article on this very site has proven himself to be the most spineless and dangerous creature to ever be given the remit to dictate on how we have sex and protect ourselves.

    As I say, in one respect you are totally right, Will. This thread HAS been an eyeopener, and a disturbing one at that, but thank God this issue is finally being debated openly and people can make up their own minds as to which is the camp with truly compassionate values. Yes, tough love hurts, but if fear campaigns is what is required to make people take notice of HIV again then so be it, because wrapping HIV in cotton wool and nailing all non-politically correct disciples to the cross is not the way forward.

  54. Will wrote:

    “I agree with Adrian. What a absolute bottom feeder you are, Sam. Yo have no proof that Linda’s story is not real, so what you have said there is simply disgusting. Well done, you make us all proud.”

    Well, Will, not only do I have proof that Linda’s story is not real, but I can also prove that Linda is not real, either. Witness:

    Linda@40 wrote:

    “Your SHRILL acquisitions of conspiracy and vengeance and is akin to that one might gain at a Rev Phelps convention.”

    Will@55 wrote:

    “What some people are trying to say here, in the mists of SHRILL accusations…”

    Now, my grasp of the English language may not be perfect, but the adjective “shrill” is not one that is ever bandied around with such monotonous frequency. On that basis alone it does not take a master of deduction to conclude that Linda and Will are in fact the same person and that, yes, someone (i.e. Will) WOULD stoop so low as to invent a brother infected with HIV in order to maintain their stand in this debate. Furthermore, the style of linguistics inherent in both “Linda” and “Will’s” postings contain identical levels of below the gutter verbiage as to make the two categorically one and the same.

    When someone can stoop so low as to invent a false tragedy which is then backed up by that same person’s alias it is downright disgusting, and shows the level of the mindsets of those who have been desperately trying to shore up the UK’s HIV sector on these boards. To quote an earlier poster, “The truth always wins”……

    Case closed.

  55. Really? So, now an a o split personality is your answer. Codex, you’ve been on this site before spouting near fundamentalist nonsense…. in fact, many suspect YOU to be a cover for Skinner or Hank, but that clearly doesn’t stop you preaching religious nonsense on this site. And the word shrill, fairly common to a half educated person really, but I was paraphrasing Linda’s post, paraphrasing the same line she used (which describes you perfectly, by the way). And this is your argument that we’re the same person?!?!?!?

    And our linguistic styles??? You used that same attack in previous thread about me and AdrianT, and someone else, didn’t you? Seems to me, its your Modus Operandi when you are faced with something you either do no understand or do not like. Very typical of you religions types to em-ploy the “seed of mistrust” approach when logic escapes you.

    Next time try answer with some semblance of intellect, not a stupid unfounded acquisitions of paranoia, there’s a good chap.

  56. “Are you implying, then, that most/all of the 3000 or so gay men who were diagniosed [sic] HIV last year contracted HIV by accident”

    Again, if you think they done this intentionally, no only are you a fool, but you’re a rather stupid one. You show me the percentage, with proof, of gay men who SEEK out HIV. Go on, amuse me with your paranoid rantings.

    “but thank God this issue”

    This line is a little give-away, isn’t it? God is exactly what you’re here to rant about, you’ve done it before on other threads. Probably EXODUS member or something. Either way, you’ve shown me nothing that proves you right or even know what you’re talking about. Just “shrill” comments about personality disorders.

  57. tongueincheek 13 Sep 2009, 12:37pm

    Brilliant deduction Codex! Of course in both posts Will/Linda/Paul/BSE ad nauseum said “shrill accusations” even if he/she/it did get their tongue tied. Oh well, at least he/she/it is making today’s imbecilic rants on a rest day and not at the taxpayer’s expense during office hours at GMFA’s Effra Road HQ…

  58. Now I’m Paul and BSE too???? My, my, my. A busy day in my head, isn’t it? Its a wonder I can concentrate with all the chatter of those multiple personalities.

    Look, there is something wrong with you people. No joke, there is. Not only do you not have one shred of proof for your acquisitions, you’re disgustingly offensive to people who have HIV, woefully ignorant of any reality, and thankfully do not represent the gay community, or normal people, for that matter. And “toungeincheek”, you want to side with a religious nut masquerading as “one of us”, by all means do, its a testament to your intelligence.

    Wen you get a valid case tpogether, I’m sure me and all the other persona’s will be delighted to hear them, we often get bored of each other in the same head after all. Until then, you’re nothing but a small handful of histrionic nutters on a gay site with very little of substance to say.

  59. will/Linda, nowhere is Codex implying that gay men infected with HIV by non-accidental means are deliberately seeking out the disease, on other words that they are bug chasers. He is clearly saying they are prepared to take the risk of not using condoms based on the balance of consequences as irresponsibly and recklessly publicised by sexual health educators who like you twist and distort the truth to fulfill your agendas. And it is clear the agenda is to facilitate the spread of HIV. Whether that is to maker pozzies feel less isolated and part of a wider community, to boost Glaxo profits or simply that a group of self loathing, homophobic gay men have hijacked public health I don’t know, but everything thy and gmfa does these days seems designedto further it’s spread, not prevent it. People have said enough and change is coming. And I don’t care if you call me Eddy, Codex, Rob, monkeychops etc. because our combined words of truth speak louder than the sum of our individual parts.

  60. As I understand it (and correct me if I’m wrong), but the rate of infection amongst gay men in the UK is starting to increase again. I also hear that this trend is repeated in the population as a whole. The concern I have here is that the approaches taken by THT and other charities does not appear (to me anyway) to be working. If they were were, then the rates would, at the very least, remain stable.

    There is a real sense that things aren’t working out – with infection rates increasing and with drug resistance becoming a more serious problem, then it would be only a matter of time before HIV/AIDS moves up to the same level of prominence as was in the 1980s.

    I remember the campaigns of yesteryear, and I did find them deeply stigmatising and upsetting and the German campaign is similar in that regard. However, what it will do is to raise the profile once again for a new generation who never lost friends to this dreadful virus.

    The German campaign shows courage, in my opinion, because it shows a willingness to tackle the problem.

    In my opinion, a fresh approach is needed (even if it’s a rehash of an older approach) and I am concerned that the current HIV/AIDS establishment appears unwilling to engage or listen.

  61. “And it is clear the agenda is to facilitate the spread of HIV”

    Well, then, you should have no problem proving me a verifiable source for this statement, given its so “clear” afterall, will you?

    Show me a study. Oh, and I am not working for any pharmaceuticals company, that is just paranoia, but I am a scientist, so forgive me if I ask for something more substantial than a few insults to persuade me that there is a world wide clandestine “agenda” in force against the gay community to infect them with the goal of making more money.

    Please, I’m all ears. Show me the figures, and how they were derived. Show me a study that is recognised as independent or reputable. Give me some hard facts that I can verify.

    Until I see this, all I see here are a bunch of low IQ nutters swinging around accusations of conspiracy, interlaced with fairly debase, and quite frankly appalling, insults directed people who have HIV.

    What I see in Ireland is some trojan work by HIV charities and NGO’s to raise awareness of HIV, support for living with the infection, and fight the stigma imposed by people like you in the 80’s.

    You all seem to know something I don’t, so please I ask again, show me your scientific sources. Humour me on this, I apologise for being too educated, and not impressionable enough to believe the conspiracy theory of a few randomers here who think I’ve got multiple personalities because I have the humanity to be sympathetic to someone living with HIV.

  62. I have been reading this thread with some interest. Especially the bits with the agenda of the drug companies. Pretty compelling. But after reading some of the comments here lads this is totally f~@!%# up paranoia. The comments about Lindas brother are well out of line and really offensive. So what if you think its not true yo just dont take the chance and talk to someone like that. And I dont see any similarity between the ones that are supposed to be the same person apart form one word that only two of them used you need to do better than that. Actually they are the only ones I can see making some sense. Whats happened here is as usual the thread has been hijacked by religious conservatives posing as gay men who are here to inform but are in fact here to spread their lies and fundie hate.

  63. I agree with Trev. Much of what has been written on here is such that people would not dare to say to say to each other’s faces.

  64. I think so too Ursus262. I have found the comments here to be somewhat lacking common decency. I certainly wouldn’t be going to the likes of Sam or Codex for HIV counselling – no more than I would Dr. Harold Shipman for medical advice or Jerry Falwell for gay support programs.

    I also support Wills call for some evidence of the somewhat wild statements made here. And please, lets keep it civil.

  65. What The F….? Some of these comments here are really disturbed. Codex/Sam/Rob (the same person???) you really need to talk to someone about whats going on in your head of yours its a sickness mate.

  66. tongueincheek 14 Sep 2009, 9:10am

    Will/Trev/Paul, you are all so predictable in your response(s). Why not just grow up?

  67. “tongueincheek”, what a truly fantastic counter argument there!

    Well, I’m glad we got that settled. And why would we bother with anything as trivial as proof of this lunatic conspiracy, that would just ruin our fun to bander about the delusions of paranoid freaks, wouldn’t it? Yes, a good old “grow up” and “your all the same person”, or maybe even a “shut up”, will quash any such puerile demands for evidence! Proof? What poppycock! Why on earth would we not take your hateful and prejudicial c**p against HIV sufferers as definitive proof that you’re anything but right?!?

    There’s some growing up needed here, but its not by me/Trev/Paul/Ian/Linda/anyone-else-who-disagrees-with-you…..

  68. “Contracting an STI full stop is not a bad indicator of what kind of a person they are.”

    Monkeychops, are you a member of the clergy? Are you some priest or minister? You are certainly judgemental about peoples’ right to enjoy sexual pleasure.

    Do you remember the evidence that came out some months ago about the dangers of drinking very hot tea? People have a right to drink tea and people have a right to enjoy sexual pleasure with others. Both carry risks. Everything in life carries risks. Nothing is black and white.

    ALL STDs should be feared. All dangers should be feared. There is nothing wrong with the role of fear. But there is a lot wrong with judging “what kind of people they are”, as you have stated, because someone contracts an illness which is difficult to treat.

    But you get back down on your knees, flagellate yourself, and tell yourself that you, unlike all the rest of us, are pure!

    You’ve only spoken like a pure fool and bigot.

  69. “”Contracting an STI full stop is not a bad indicator of what kind of a person they are.” Monkeychops, are you a member of the clergy? Are you some priest or minister? You are certainly judgemental about peoples’ right to enjoy sexual pleasure.

    Well said Eddy. Monkeychops has been seen before to have some kind of internalised homophobia (for want of a better term) and has an aversion to all things that relate to “gay” (he thinks all gay men are drug abusing, vain sex maniacs with suicidal tenancies… apparently) despite claiming to be actually gay himself. In fact, the only thing he seems to be good at is being offensive and bitchy.

    What he thinks of HIV and its sufferers isn’t really much for concern, he’s only short of calling it GRIDS again. A deeply disturbed individual with all the world experience of a termite as far as I can make out.

  70. Umm, this is getting even more bizarre. The last posting from Trev was not me – though lets face it Trev isn’t exactly an unusual name. I agree with many of the other things he stated but the drugs company paranoia is way off. Not that any of us should trust large corporations that are primarily there to make money.

  71. I have to say I have found this thread an eye-opening read. I like to think I have an open mind and it is clear Will or whoever is trying to dislodge this argument by insinuating that anyone who does not agree with his stand – which is one and the same with the policies of the HIV charity sector, it seems – hates HIVers. This quite clearly is not true. I have found the postings of Eddy, Rob, Sam and the rest to be truly impassioned and they clearly are speaking from the heart here.
    I was at Soho Live! yesterday and there were people with clipboards doing a survey about today’s sex campaigns and our attitudes to HIV. Quite a grouping of people gathered, all eager to say their piece, and it was unanimous that people want hard-hitting adverts back and that today’s campaigns have lost their way and have distorted the truth of what HIV is. I do not know whether this is an HIV charity sector survey, in which case they may not make this survey public as it clearly paints them in a damning light.
    There was such a sense of outrage and betrayal from what I saw among those who participated. Maybe this is the “change” in the air several people on here have commented about. There is a real appetite for change, that’s for sure, but I sense from these boards that the HIV charity sector won’t go quietly and are capable of dirty tricks and derring do to maintain their cosy, public funded cartel at all costs.
    Change is so badly needed, you can feel it on the streets. Thanks to those on here who believe in fighting for the truth because truth is knowledge and knowledge is power, and it is time we empowered ourselves again as a community to stay fit and healthy so that those who would seek to exploit our weaknesses are never able to make an industry of our suffering ever again. And yes, I am a believer that the HIV charity sector serves its and the pharmaceutical cartel’s interests above the gay man on the street, and I am not the only once.
    The only organisation Mr. Nick Partridge should be awarded Hero of the Year by is Glaxo. It is a joke that Stonewall have nominated him as such, but then it is such an incestuous old boys’ club in the gay mafia that this is only to be expected.

  72. Is it too much to ask that people read comment before they paste their own interpretation on them?

    No, Ilias, I never said that anyone who disagrees with me is a “hates HIVers”, and to say that is just adding another voice to the lunatic histrionics on this thread.

    Look, if someone is claiming that the drug companies have a “clear the agenda is to facilitate the spread of HIV”, its not too much to ask for proof that that, is it? Being “impassioned” is not proof. Without proof, the statement is nothing more than conjecture and paranoia.

    And I’ve yet to see any of this proof… but I’ve been told its very clear and abundant, so I’m at a loss as to why its not been presented yet.

    And no, I am not… what do these freaks call it… a “hiv sector troll”, just someone who is more receptive to the debate of rationale than paranoid assertions that anyone who disagrees with the “conspiracy” is naturally part of it, or worse, the “same person”. But clearly I’m a minority in here, I apologise for having a brain or an education.

  73. Ilias’s comments above chime very closely with me feelings, because I believe that there is an orthodoxy that, when challenged, leads to the most agressive, almost abusive fight back. Quite extraordinary really.

    The current approach to dealing with HIV simply isn’t working, and a new approach is needed. The public funding of these charities appears to make them almost quango-like in that they transpose government policies, but without any of the protections that go with giving this task to civil servants, whereby they have to be impartial and have to listen and consult.

    The current arrangements are not serving our community very well and I think that the truth about HIV should be made clearer- that it’s not easy being HIV+. We don’t even know about the life expectancy because many of those who were infected in the 1980s and 1990s are now, at most, in their fifties. It will be at least ten years or so before those on retroviral therapies reach, for want of a better way of putting it, “dying age”.

    One thing I have learned in life, is that you never stop learning about new information that comes to light. It is possible that, in another thirty years’ time, today’s twentysomethings could be drug-resistant, ill, and bitter that the establishment that was supposed to protect them, didn’t protect them at all. My only hope is that I turn out to be wrong.

  74. tongueincheek 14 Sep 2009, 11:44pm

    Voices of sanity, thank you Ilias and ursus262. This thread of late has become ambushed by Will and his aliases and has become oh so infuriating as a result. Look, it is not rocket science to deduce that if someone contracts HIV and is put on pharmaceutical medications for the rest of their natural, that for every day of their life they will then have to ingest toxic, get that TOXIC, drugs? It stands to reason that their life-expectancy will be shortened as a result, and the new report posted above by Eddy is proof of that.

    The lie that has been bandied about by THT and GMFA is that HIV today is totally manageable and that you can live a happy and normal lifespan – I know, I have heard it from the GMFA horse’s mouth! We badly need a street survey to find out just how many gullible, naive guys in their 20s have swallowed this monumental lie hook, line and sinker and believe it to be true. And we need to ask who made this lie up, why they made it up, and to what end, because it clearly is NOT serving the gay community. No, the only bastion it can possibly benefit are the charities themselves who provide HIV user services for which they receive government funding to provide, and of course the (dare I say it) pharmaceutical companies (ooh, hush my mouth!!).

    Will, you bleat on and on about proof, but sometimes the elephant in the room is so bloody enormous that just because people like you still fail to see it doesn’t mean the rest of us are blind to it too.

  75. “get that TOXIC, drugs?”

    And you think chemotherapy is a walk in the park? What drug therapy is not “toxic” (I’m using your histrionic word to help validate you)? What a truly stupid thing to say.

    Did I say the drug therapy was easy? No.

    Did I say that contracting HIV is okay because of the drug treatment? No.

    Did I say the drug treatment will give you a normal life expectancy? No.

    “Will, you bleat on and on about proof, but sometimes the elephant in the room is so bloody enormous that just because people like you still fail to see it doesn’t mean the rest of us are blind to it too.”

    Oh, REALLY? When why the hell is it so bloody hard for you to produce this????? Seriously, if its SO feckin obvious, where is it then????

    Wide outlandish statements without any proof, especially when asked so many times, are just that:- wild outlandish statement. Or worse, you’re a lair with your own agenda, not that that woudl be a surprise on this site.

    Look, this is getting ridiculous, you’re clearly an idiot. I am just repeating myself to a fool like you, and that’s a fault on my behalf for thinking you could actually conduct a argument of reason, so I do apologise. Just because you have a littler hissy fit doesn’t make something true, and your inexplicable inability to produce this “huge white elephant” only proves you’re more histrionics than substance. God forbid, you actually need treatment in your life for something…. lets see how turn down the “toxic” drugs to prolong your sorry little life.

    If this thread has become “ambushed by Will and his aliases” (again with the paranoia… paranoia is not a valid argument, by the way, it just makes you look more stupid in my eyes) then it has been “ambushed” by the few people who have any reason in their mind. Please, do continue the melodrama by way of a valid argument, it amuses me.

    I’m not going to respond to this thread again, its a lesson in futility.

  76. Trevor Wakeham (not Trev) 15 Sep 2009, 9:07am

    Sorry Trev mate I’ll use my full name this time. I didn’t see your post previously and I didnt mean to hijack your name :-)

    I wanted to say again some of these postings are nothing but ad hominem arguments and deeply offensive to anyone civilised. Will did nothing but ask for of some proof to your statements, tongue in cheek. Nothing wrong with that. Proof is the basis of all reason, isnt it? And he has asked many times. But the response was that me, Linda, Will and are the same person, and the attacks on Linda alone were just amazing in their brutality. I dont think you represent normal gay people in any way or do our cause use any good with what you say and the way you say it. Anyone coming in here for the first time woudl think us either utterly mad or complete bitches. And god help anyone actually suffering with hiv reading this they must be appalled. At least ursus262 makes a civil argument, the rest of you could learn from her/him. Some of you should be ashamed of yourself. And I dont really care if you think were all the same person because I disagree with you, that only proves my point.

  77. I understand that proof that gay men in London today do not believe that the GMFA’s and THT’s efforts at preventing HIV are effective is in the offing. When it appears it will be fascinating to watch how the denialists, GMFA and THT and their supporters, respond to it.

  78. Brian Burton 19 Sep 2009, 8:32am

    The power of advertizing…..All nine day wonders and seemingly uneffective in the end. The need for sex, companionship, Love, is always formost in the mind of the seeker. Health matters happen after the event, seems it has always been so. I really care about gays who fall foul of un-safe sex life-styles then wind up wishing they had taken precausions. HIV I fear, will continue to show the world it’s shame.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.